Jacob Valine v. United States Department of Labor; Lori Chavez-Deremer

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: October 20, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-08260
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JACOB VALINE, Plaintiff, 25-CV-8260 (LTS) -against- ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; LORI CHAVEZ-DEREMER, Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: By order dated October 14, 2025, the Court directed that this action be transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. (ECF 5.) That order was entered on the court’s docket on October 15, 2025. On October 14, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal, which was entered on the docket on October 17, 2025. (ECF 7.) Because this case has been transferred, the Court first considers whether it has jurisdiction to consider Plaintiff’s notice. Normally, the transfer of a case divests the transferor court of jurisdiction over the action. Drabik v. Murphy, 246 F.2d 408, 409 (2d Cir. 1957) (holding that district court did not have jurisdiction to rule on motion following physical transfer of case). The transferor court, however, retains jurisdiction over the action if the party seeking review acts to stay the transfer “prior to receipt of the action’s papers by the clerk of the transferee court.” Warrick v. Gen. Electric Co., 70 F.3d 736, 739 (2d Cir. 1995). Because the notice of voluntary dismissal was filed on October 14, 2025, “prior to receipt of the action’s papers by the clerk of the transferee court,” Warrick, 70 F.3d at 739, this Court has jurisdiction to consider the notice. The Court grants Plaintiff’s request to withdraw this action. The complaint is voluntarily dismissed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a).1 The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all pending motions. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an

appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. Dated: October 20, 2025 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

1 A voluntary dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a) is without prejudice. “But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal-or state-court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B).